مشخصات پژوهش

This study addresses a significant gap in Soyinka scholarship by demonstrating that ritual in his drama functions as a complex psychological system rather than as a static cultural artifact or political metaphor. Previous critics emphasize historical, mythic, or ethical dimensions, yet they rarely analyze the psychic processes that shape ritual authority. A psychoanalytic frame reveals how Soyinka embeds within his plays a sustained interrogation of repression, desire, guilt, and symbolic fragility. Scholars such as Abiola Irele acknowledge the metaphysical and mythic features of Soyinka’s dramaturgy, but they do not examine how these features operate within psychic structures (Irele 112). This project therefore fills a conceptual void by locating ritual within a matrix of psychic demands, symbolic law, and affective tension. The study’s comparative design also advances Soyinka criticism. By placing Death and the King’s Horseman and The Strong Breed within a single analytic frame, the project uncovers patterns of psychic rupture that traverse colonial and postcolonial contexts. The comparison foregrounds how external authority and internal repression destabilize ritual structures. Critics such as Ketu Katrak and Tejumola Olaniyan underscore Soyinka’s political vision, yet they do not integrate psychoanalytic theory to explain symbolic breakdown (Katrak 64; Olaniyan 93). A psychoanalytic approach illuminates why ritual authority collapses and how characters negotiate desire and duty in moments of crisis. Freud, Lacan, Kristeva, and Fanon provide conceptual tools that deepen our understanding of sacrifice, symbolic transgression, abjection, and colonial affect. Finally, the study contributes to broader debates in postcolonial literature. It offers a model for psychoanalytic criticism that maintains historical sensitivity and cultural specificity. The project thus strengthens the theoretical vocabulary available for analyzing ritual drama while advancing a more nuanced